VELEI>LA LATA. 343 



So far as specimens from different regions of the Pacific are concerned, the 

 present collection shows no features to differentiate more than the one species, 

 and I have no hesitation in following Chun in uniting all previously described 

 Pacific Velellas. However, I am not prepared to follow him in uniting with 

 them the various Indian forms, simply for the reason that it is futile to attempt 

 any revision of the latter without access to a considerable series of specimens 

 from the Indian ocean. It is impossible to tell from the descriptions by Chamisso 

 and Eysenhardt ('21), Eschscholtz ('29) and Brandt ('35) whether their material 

 more nearly resembled the Atlantic, or the Pacific species, or whether they formed 

 a connecting link between the two. 



In determining a specific name for the composite Pacific species I maj^ point 

 out that although A. Agassiz ('65b) called his specimens V. septentrionalis Esch- 

 scholtz, and in spite of the fact Agassiz and Mayer (:02) and Lens and Van 

 Riemsdijk ( : 08) used the name V. pacifica Eschscholtz for Tropical Pacific and 

 Malaysian Velellas, two Pacific species had been described previous to Esch- 

 scholtz's work. These are V. oblonga and V. lata of Chamisso and Eysenhardt 

 ('21). My choice as between the two falls upon lata, for the reason that, while 

 both are described on the same page and figured on the same plate, lata agrees 

 very well in general form with the Pacific specimens I have examined, whereas 

 oblonga is so much longer in proportion to breadth than even the longest Atlantic 

 specimens that it is probably founded on an abnormal individual. 



The only Velellas described from the Pacific within i-ecent years, so far as 

 I can learn, are V. meridionalis Fewkes ('89b) from the coast of California, 

 and V. lobata, Haeckel ('88b) from the South Pacific. The first of these, founded 

 on young specimens as Fewkes himself suggested, is supposed to be separated 

 from the other species from the same region (F. septentrionalis = T^. lata Cham- 

 isso and Eysenhardt) by a more oval mantle. But the fact that in the "Albatross " 

 series small specimens have a rounded, larger ones a more nearly rectangular, 

 outline shows that this difference is merely a growth character. 1'. lobata 

 Haeckel was neither described nor figured. It is, therefore, a nomen midem. 



Velella lata Chamisso and Eysenhardt. 



Velella lata Chamisso and Eysenhardt, '21, p. 364, tab. .32, fig. 3 A-B; Eschscholtz, '29, p. 172. 

 Velella oblonga Ch.^mi.sso and Eysenhardt, '21, p. 3(54, tab. 32, fig, 2 A-C; Eschscholtz, '29, p. 171; 



Haeckel, '8Sb, p. 83. 

 Velella sandwichiana de Haan, '27, p. 493. 

 Velella radackiana de Haan, '27, p. 493. 



Velella emarginala QuoY and Gaimard, '24, p. 586, pi. 86, fig. 9. 

 Velella seiplenirioiialix Eschscholtz, '29, p. 171, taf. 15, fig. 1; A. .Vcassiz, 'ti.")b, p. 217. 



